Showing posts with label feminism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label feminism. Show all posts

Tuesday, 23 February 2016

Girls outside

This is a text I wrote on helgon.se in 2008.

--------------------------
Girls outside

In the Muslim correspondence to Sunday school, in some country - I've forgotten which one - only boys sit in the class rooms. The girls sit outside, on the ground, and listen through the window. Education is not meant for girls, only for boys. But even girls need to grow up to become good, Muslim women, and even girls are of course taught to love God, and therefore they come to every class hour, take a seat outside the window, and listen when the boys are being educated.

Some of the things said in there are only applicable to boys. Then the girls can close their ears for a moment. But they have to be alert and open them again, when something is said that is applicable to them too, because there will be no signal to tell when they are included again. Since it isn't actually meant for them. When the male teacher says: “This you'll do good to remember”, they'll have to come to their own conclusion of whether what is said after that is something that applies to them, and that they will therefore do good to remember, or not.

And of course they can never ask any questions. And I wonder if the male teacher ever says anything that applies only to girls? If so, how does he frame it? He probably doesn't turn towards the window and says: “You girls will do good to remember...”. Probably he says: “Girls do good to remember...”, to the boys. As if it were very important for boys to know what girls need to remember! Outside the window, the girls sit and make a note to remember that thing, though nobody told them to. It was never said directly to them, but they know that they are expected to hear it, and to abide.


How unbearably derogatory! What a killer mental abuse to never be directly addressed in this way, but to still be expected to sit there and listen attentively! To sometimes have to realize that 'oh ok, this part actually wasn't meant for me FOR REAL, whereas they otherwise only express themselves as if it weren't meant for me, although it is'! What an awful, contemptuous way this country treats its female citizens in!...



...But are we really that much better? Is it all that different when we talk about businessmen, congressmen, Englishmen and cave men?... Some claim that these words include also women, but do they really? Does really the WORD include women, or is it just the thing it denotes that very well may include women? And it's up to the women themselves to figure out whether what is being said at the moment can be applied to them or not, without the rest of us (us men, whom the words are actually for) having to bother our busy heads with that? 'Sometimes the word applies only to men; the rest of the time we only express ourselves as if it did.'?

I once said to a man, who had just claimed that such words were totally gender neutral:
“Would anybody ever say: 'When a businessman becomes pregnant... what social welfare system applies to zim?' for example?”
Do you know what he replied?... He said:
“...It is very unusual that one would want to say such a phrase.”
Oh. Well I guess the problem is solved then. We never talk about when businessmen, middlemen, firemen or madmen become pregnant, take maternity leave, menstruate or have PMS at work or in treatment, or when they reach their menopause, and therefore it is totally fine that we also in future will never talk about these things, because it sounds so absurdly ridiculous with a bunch of fireman with PMS!... Most likely something inside us will stop us, before we even THINK such a phrase!...

A bit later this man however said that it was much better to say “member of congress” instead of “congressman”, in this particular discussion. For a brief second I felt a bit encouraged, thinking that this might be an opening. Until I learned that he didn't at all think that one EXPRESSION, in itself, was any better than the other. It was only in the discussion with ME that he preferred one over the other, so that I wouldn't have to be annoyed by this fictive problem, and instead could focus on the matter of discussion... Something which could have been achieved just as well by me coming to my senses, and just not getting annoyed by this to begin with... Just like the girls outside the Quran school classroom probably don't sit and get annoyed by the way things are. Nobody built the system to be bad, and it's better to give one's attention to the education, than to pettinesses, such as in what form it is given.

-----------------------
For publishing the text here, I've been looking for a source of the girls outside the school window and didn't find any. I'm pretty sure we learned about them in school though... And in any case, here's a Wikipedia page that at least confirms that it's quite common (or at least has been) that girls are not formally enrolled in school, but attend anyway, informally:



Saturday, 23 February 2013

Children stories

Children stories



When I was a child I thought "Lille Skutt" ("Little Skip"), in the Swedish children's magazine Bamse, was a girl.


I also thought the rabbit in Winnie the Pooh was a girl, and I think I might have believed that even Piglet was (she was pink, after all!). I'm sure there must have been plenty of others in plenty of stories that I've forgotten, that I thought were girls, but it turned out with time, character by character, that I was wrong. None of them were girls. If on the other hand I thought they were boys, then I’d be right. Every time.


When I learned that Little Skip was a he, I didn’t like it at first, and I decided to ignore it and let her stay a she in my world. Partly of course since she already was a she to me and it would be hard and a bit of a shame to have to rethink and change everything; partly because I thought it was more suitable with a she-figure for a rabbit (with a pink scut!); But partly also because I thought that if Little Skip was also a boy, then they would all be boys! Bamse, Skalman ("Shell man" the tortoise) and Little Skip. Piglet, Rabbit, Pooh, Eeyore, Tiggr, well everyone, except Christoffer Robin’s faceless mother! And in the opinion of my little child brain, that wouldn’t be as interesting…



But of course I had to give in pretty soon, when I learned to read myself. Oh, and then he ran off and married, with a chick with blue eyes, three times his size, and a scut as pink as his. And homosexuality was not something I knew anything about.



My friend and first love Simon from England was here for a visit just now. It turned out that Simon would call everyone and everything “he”. The driver of the car way over there, and of course “the rich man” or “the politician” in the examples, but also the sea gulls, the worms, even the pieces in the checker game.
“How do you know it’s a he?”, I asked a few times, and of course he didn't. Then we agreed that just for fun we would start calling everyone “she” instead, every time we didn't know, or it didn’t really matter. Simon was quite bad at it in the beginning, but he got better with time.

It was on the final day of his stay that we played checkers. None of us had played it very much before so we were happily discussing the tactics, for the mutual learning. I called the pieces “this one” or “that one”, he called them “he”, and so we decided that they must be shes; short, violent little girls fighting to extinguish one another. It didn’t help. When the excitement gripped us I would still say “this one” and he would say “he”. I corrected him time after time, and eventually he interrupted the tactics talk and looked up with surprise…
“Why is it so hard?!”, I asked. “I know you’re trying, so why is it still so impossible to see genderless pieces as ‘she’ when it works perfectly fine to see them as ‘he’?”
“…But I guess I don’t really have a reason to want to change”, said he. “I have to take offense myself, and feel that it's wrong to hear myself call them ‘he’, and I don’t really, quite the contrary! Because in fact, if all the important ones are always hes, then it means that I'm important. It tells me that I am better than you! And that makes me feel goood! Weheeey!”
He rose a fist towards the sky.

After that analysis, all the pieces really where shes, and nobody got it wrong anymore. Suddenly Simon burst out:
“Now all of a sudden it feels unfair that they are all shes!!! Why are they ALL shes, it doesn’t feel good at all, I’m actually a bit pissed off by that!”
We smiled, and then he said with a softer voice:
“And that's scary, because then I realise that this is how you must be feeling all the time…”


Yeah. I suppose it is.

And had the world gone from an equal representation to this tremendous unbalance over-night, had someone suggested: ‘Hey, I know! Let’s make all examples into only one of the genders! For simplicity! (Except parents, some low-salary professionals etc, that we'll consistently call the opposite gender!)’, it would never have happened. People would not see the point! People would have objected! And been angry, pissed off! But I was just a child when I slowly learned to realize that I was not to be regarded, never present among the examples. I never got pissed off. Only surprised. Perplexed. Disappointed. Humbled, pushed down and stepped upon…

Later, there are some who get angry. We have a name for those. We call them 'rabid man haters' and claim contemptfully that they get all worked up over nothing. That they act counterproductively to the struggle for gender equality, which is a totally different thing.